Genetic Modification of Human Embryos: Limits

O. Savvina
{"title":"Genetic Modification of Human Embryos: Limits","authors":"O. Savvina","doi":"10.21146/2074-4870-2022-22-1-124-134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyses the moral justification of human germline editing and the tendency to its legalization. The study is based on documents of international organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), national bioethics committees and others that regulate the usage of technologies for human germline editing or issue related recommendations. The paper an­alyzes the impact of the introduction of new technologies on human germline editing recom­mendations. It is concluded that that the development of biotechnologies contributes to lib­eral attitude towards human germline editing, slowly canceling the technologies’ usage ban firstly for therapeutic purposes, and then for the human enhancement purposes. The article suggests that the development of biotechnologies makes it difficult to apply the old bioethics principles; and exacerbates the discussion about the boundaries of the new biotechnologies’ application. Despite the shock and condemnation of the first experiments that violate ban (as in the cases with CRISPR/Cas9 in 2015 and 2018 in China), the scientific community, international organizations and governments return to the issue concerning gene editing technologies limitation. The inability to be guided by the old bioethics principles forces to look for new ethical grounds for gene editing. Now old principles and values are applied with utilitarian approach in ethics, that cancel ban and raises the issue of human germline editing limitation. The article also describes the limits of permissible interventions in the is­sue of human germline editing at the end of 2021.","PeriodicalId":360102,"journal":{"name":"Ethical Thought","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethical Thought","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21146/2074-4870-2022-22-1-124-134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article analyses the moral justification of human germline editing and the tendency to its legalization. The study is based on documents of international organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), national bioethics committees and others that regulate the usage of technologies for human germline editing or issue related recommendations. The paper an­alyzes the impact of the introduction of new technologies on human germline editing recom­mendations. It is concluded that that the development of biotechnologies contributes to lib­eral attitude towards human germline editing, slowly canceling the technologies’ usage ban firstly for therapeutic purposes, and then for the human enhancement purposes. The article suggests that the development of biotechnologies makes it difficult to apply the old bioethics principles; and exacerbates the discussion about the boundaries of the new biotechnologies’ application. Despite the shock and condemnation of the first experiments that violate ban (as in the cases with CRISPR/Cas9 in 2015 and 2018 in China), the scientific community, international organizations and governments return to the issue concerning gene editing technologies limitation. The inability to be guided by the old bioethics principles forces to look for new ethical grounds for gene editing. Now old principles and values are applied with utilitarian approach in ethics, that cancel ban and raises the issue of human germline editing limitation. The article also describes the limits of permissible interventions in the is­sue of human germline editing at the end of 2021.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人类胚胎的基因改造:限制
文章分析了人类生殖细胞编辑的道德正当性及其合法化趋势。这项研究基于国际组织的文件,如世界卫生组织(世卫组织)、国家生物伦理委员会和其他规范人类生殖细胞编辑技术使用或发布相关建议的组织。本文分析了新技术的引入对人类生殖细胞编辑建议的影响。结论是,生物技术的发展有助于对人类生殖细胞编辑的自由态度,慢慢地取消了技术的使用禁令,首先用于治疗目的,然后用于人类增强目的。文章认为,生物技术的发展使旧的生命伦理原则难以适用;并且加剧了关于新生物技术应用边界的讨论。尽管对首批违反禁令的实验(如2015年和2018年中国的CRISPR/Cas9实验)感到震惊和谴责,科学界、国际组织和各国政府还是回到了基因编辑技术限制的问题上。旧的生物伦理原则无法指导,迫使人们为基因编辑寻找新的伦理依据。现在,旧的原则和价值观在伦理学上被功利主义的方法所应用,这取消了禁令,并提出了人类生殖细胞编辑限制的问题。这篇文章还描述了在2021年底人类生殖系编辑问题中允许干预的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
On the Ethical, Moral and Pragmatic Justification of Political Decisions The Idea of Just War in the Western Ethical Tradition (from Antiquity to the Mid-18th Century) Proceedings of a Discussion on the Paper “Moral Philosophy and Ethics”, by Abduslam Guseynov, a Member of Russian Academy of Sciences Aristotle in the Moral Philosophy of the Early Modern Period (Treatise of H. Grotius «On the Law of War and Peace») Jus Post Bellum in Just War Theory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1